Excerpt:.....to the persons concerned, the period of limitation for filing an appeal would commence from the date when the parties concerned acquire knowledge of passing of the said order. - 1 of 24th july, 1970, referred to above, whereby it was specifically directed that no tax on cotton seeds be realised for the period 14th may, 1964, to 27th february, 1969, there is no escape from the conclusion that the petitioners are clearly entitled to the refund of the amount paid by them as tax on cotton seeds in respect of this period.s.s. sodhi, j.1. this order will dispose of writ petition no. 4499 of 1974 and two other writ petitions filed by the same petitioner, being civil writ petitions nos. 4500 and 4501 of 1974. the question arising for determination in all these writ petitions being the same, they were all heard together.2. the petitioner is a dealer in cotton oil-seeds. this firm was assessed to tax under the haryana general sales tax act on the purchase turnover of cotton seeds for the period 14th may, 1964, to 27th february, 1969. on 24th july, 1970, a direction was issued by respondent no. 1, the excise and taxation commissioner, haryana, to the effect that no tax on cotton seeds be realised for the period in question. the petitioner-firm having already paid this tax applied for the refund of the amount.....

Judgment:

S.S. Sodhi, J.

1. This order will dispose of Writ Petition No. 4499 of 1974 and two other writ petitions filed by the same petitioner, being Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 4500 and 4501 of 1974. The question arising for determination in all these writ petitions being the same, they were all heard together.

2. The petitioner is a dealer in cotton oil-seeds. This firm was assessed to tax under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act on the purchase turnover of cotton seeds for the period 14th May, 1964, to 27th February, 1969. On 24th July, 1970, a direction was issued by respondent No. 1, the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, to the effect that no tax on cotton seeds be realised for the period in question. The petitioner-firm having already paid this tax applied for the refund of the amount paid as tax for the aforesaid period. The refusal of the respondents to refund this amount led to the filing of the present writ petitions.

3. In the face of the letter of respondent No. 1 of 24th July, 1970, referred to above, whereby it was specifically directed that no tax on cotton seeds be realised for the period 14th May, 1964, to 27th February, 1969, there is no escape from the conclusion that the petitioners are clearly entitled to the refund of the amount paid by them as tax on cotton seeds in respect of this period. To deny this relief to them, besides other legal infirmities, would also amount to discrimination inasmuch as it would be putting persons who had paid the tax for this period in a worse position than those who did not care to do so. There is also, here, an averment in the petition that the amount of tax has in fact been refunded to some other persons similarly placed. This has not been specifically denied in the return filed by the respondents.

4. In the result these three writ petitions are hereby accepted and a direction is issued to respondent No. 1 to refund to the petitioners the amount recovered as tax on cotton seeds pertaining to the period 14th May, 1964, to 27th February, 1969. These writ petitions are accepted with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 500, one set.